Site Mobile Navigation

Vermont Lawmakers Consider Same-Sex Marriage Bill

Vermont legislators are holding hearings this week on a measure that could make the state the third to allow same-sex marriage.

The state pioneered civil unions, becoming the first to grant them in 2000, but advocates of same-sex marriage have said civil unions are inadequate, and they are pressing for the further rights and recognition that such marriages could bestow.

Democratic leaders, who control both chambers of the Vermont Legislature, pledged earlier this month to pass a same-sex-marriage bill before adjournment in May. The State Senate Judiciary Committee is taking testimony on the legal, social and practical implications of same-sex marriage and is to hear from the public Wednesday night at the State Capitol.

This is a highly charged political issue, and many remember that more than a dozen legislators were voted out of office after they supported civil unions in 2000. The governor, Jim Douglas, a Republican, opposes the bill, saying civil unions go far enough, but he has not specifically said he would veto it. If he did, it is not clear if Democrats would have the votes to override it.

“We’re hoping we don’t have to go there,” said Beth Robinson, chairwoman of the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force, and a lawyer in Middlebury. “We hope this plays out in a way that the governor is onboard. But our focus now isn’t on overriding a veto; it’s on getting as many votes in the House and Senate as we can.”

Steve Cable, who is president of Vermont Renewal and a spokesman for the Vermont Marriage Advisory Council, both of which oppose the measure, said civil unions already provided enough benefits. Mr. Cable is also protesting the process by which the bill is, he said, being “pushed through.”

Most of those testifying this week are supporters of the bill, Mr. Cable said. “This is very undemocratic behavior.”

He wants the matter to be decided by voters in a resolution next year, but that idea has gotten little traction.

The Democratic leaders want to replace civil unions, which have been on the wane, with a law that would allow same-sex marriage starting Sept. 1. The state would still recognize the civil unions that had been performed in Vermont over the last nine years but would not grant new ones after Sept. 1.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

The issue of same-sex marriage has been roiling across the country and picked up steam in the last few years, with many states fighting it out in their courts and legislatures. Massachusetts and Connecticut are the only states that permit same-sex marriage, and they did so through court rulings; Vermont would be the first to do so through its elected representatives.

Many gay men and lesbians and supporters of same-sex marriage — in Vermont and across the country — say civil unions have proved to be inadequate. They want a law that would confer more rights, protections and better benefits, including access to health care. In Vermont, the number of civil unions has fallen sharply, to 262 last year from 1,876 in 2001.

The arguments of each side are pithily expressed by the stickers that advocates are wearing as Vermont’s lawmakers take testimony. Opponents wear stickers that say, “Marriage: A mother and father for every child,” while supporters’ stickers say, “From legal rights to equal rights.”

In addition to Vermont, New Hampshire, which also allows civil unions, is working toward a same-sex-marriage bill. Its House Judiciary Committee is planning a vote soon on that measure; a subcommittee approved the bill earlier along party lines, with Democrats for and Republicans against.

If the full committee follows suit, the bill could reach the House floor on Tuesday, said Representative James R. Splaine, Democrat of Portsmouth.

Democrats control both chambers and the governor’s office in New Hampshire, though that is no guarantee of passage.

In California, which has domestic-partner laws, courts declared last year that a ban on same-sex marriage was illegal and 18,000 such marriages took place, but voters in November rejected the ruling. The issue is back in court, where arguments were heard on March 5; a ruling is expected within 90 days.

In New Hampshire, the vote this afternoon in the house judiciary committee ended in a 10-10 tie. Nine of the 11 Democrats on the committee supported the bill, as did one of the nine Republicans.
Mr. Splaine said that the bill would still go to the full house on Tuesday "without recommendation," which happens now and then.

An earlier version of this article imprecisely stated the number of same-sex marriages in California.